ci: don't run shard 2/12 ubsan without parallel.
What changed, and why it matters
This commit changes a single CI (Continuous Integration) test configuration line. It removes a setting that forced one specific test shard to run without parallel workers, because doing so made the shard take over two hours and time out. There is no change to the actual Core Lightning software, its network protocol, wallet handling, or any user-facing behavior. It is purely an internal testing infrastructure tweak.
No security action needed. This is a CI configuration change. Reviewers may verify that the shard now completes within the timeout and that ASan/UBSan still catches issues, but the change itself introduces no security risk.
Security signals we found
No strong security signals were identified.
Evidence from the diff
The patch modifies .github/workflows/ci.yaml, changing PYTEST_OPTS for the ASan/UBSan (02/12) shard from ‘–test-group=2 –test-group-count=12 -n 1’ to ‘–test-group=2 –test-group-count=12’. The -n 1 flag forced pytest-xdist to run with a single worker. The commit message explains that an earlier change added this to avoid a Docker OOM kill (signal 143), but with the test suite now split into 12 groups, the memory pressure rationale no longer applies and the serial run caused a timeout. No application code is modified.
Changed components
.github/workflows/ci.yamlCI pipeline: ASan/UBSan shard 02/12Inspect captured patch +1 / −1
diff --git a/.github/workflows/ci.yaml b/.github/workflows/ci.yaml
index 2c7a9b9c..f0b531c8 100644
--- a/.github/workflows/ci.yaml
+++ b/.github/workflows/ci.yaml
@@ -553,7 +553,7 @@ jobs:
PYTEST_OPTS: --test-group=1 --test-group-count=12
- NAME: ASan/UBSan (02/12)
GROUP: 2
- PYTEST_OPTS: --test-group=2 --test-group-count=12 -n 1
+ PYTEST_OPTS: --test-group=2 --test-group-count=12
- NAME: ASan/UBSan (03/12)
GROUP: 3
PYTEST_OPTS: --test-group=3 --test-group-count=12
Why this scored 15/100
Community notes
Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.
The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.